Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T21:29:48.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of a morphological class

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Gregory R. Guy  and
Sally Boyd
Gregory R. Guy
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Sally Boyd
Affiliation:
Göteborgs Universitet
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

English has a class of “semiweak” verbs, which in the past tense have root-vowel ablaut as well as reflexes of the apical stop suffix, for example, kept, told. This study traces the development of this class in a sample of speakers aged 4–65. The evidence is derived from the variable rates of occurrence of the final -t,d in these words in the speech of individuals of different ages. The rate of -t,d absence in semiweak verbs systematically declines with increasing age. We identify three ontogenetic stages in the development of the class. In children's speech, these segments rarely appear, suggesting they are underlyingly absent. In young adults they appear but undergo the variable -t,d deletion process of English at the same high rate as noninflectional -t,d in words like west, old, implying that such speakers do not treat them as affixes. Finally, some adult speakers show a lowered deletion rate, suggesting that they accord the final stops separate morphemic status. The age distribution of this pattern implies that speakers only arrive at this analysis in adult life, after the age when acquisition is often assumed to be complete.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , March 1990 , pp. 1 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bates, E. & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In MacWhinney, (1987). 157–193.Google Scholar
Baugh, J. (1983). Black street speech. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, S. & Guy, G. R. (1979). The acquisition of a morphological category. Paper presented at the Linguistic Society of America annual meeting; also presented at the Australian Linguistic Society annual meeting, 1980.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L. & Slobin, D. I. (1982). Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 58:265–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cedergren, H. & Sankoff, D. (1973). Variable rules: Performance as a statistical reflection of competence. Language 50:333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Fasold, R. W. (1972). Tense marking in Black English. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. D. & Crain, S. (1987). Simplicity and generality of rules in language acquisition. In MacWhinney, (1987). 35–63.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. (1977). A new look at -t,d deletion. In Fasold, R. W. & Shuy, R. W. (eds.), Studies in language variation. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 1–11.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. (1980). Variation in the group and the individual: The case of final stop deletion. In Labov, (1980). 1–36.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. & Bisol, L. (1988). Phonological theory and variable data. Paper presented at NWAV-XVII,Université de Montréal. [To appear in Portuguese in Organon.]Google Scholar
Guy, G. R., Horvath, B., Vonwiller, J., Daisley, E. & Rogers, I. (1986). An intonational change in progress in Australian English. Language in Society 15(1):23–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P. (1985). Some consequences of lexical phonology. Phonology Yearbook 2:85–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language 45:715–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1972a). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972b). Where do grammars stop? In Shuy, R. W. (ed.), Sociolinguistics: Current trends and prospects (GURT 23). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 43–88Google Scholar
Labov, W. (ed.) (1980). Locating language in time and space. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1981). What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic description? In Sankoff, D. & Cedergren, H. (eds.), Variation omnibus. Edmonton: Linguistic Research. 177–200.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1984). Field methods used by the project on linguistic change and variation. In Baugh, J. & Sherzer, J. (eds.), Language in use: Readings in sociolinguistics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1989). The child as linguistic historian. Language Variation and Change 1:85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W., Cohen, P., Robins, C. & Lewis, J. (1968). A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto Rican speakers in New York City. Report on Co-operative Research Project 3288. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. & Labov, T. (1977). Learning the syntax of questions. In Campbell, R. & Smith, P. (eds.), Recent advances in the psychology of Language (Vol. 2). New York: Plenum. 1–44.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1976). Hungarian research on the acquisition of morphology and syntax. Journal of Child Language 3:397–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (ed.) (1987). Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marchman, V. (1988). Rules and regularities in the acquisition of the English past tense. Center for Research in Language Newsletter Vol. 2, No. 4 (04).Google Scholar
Mohanan, K. P. (1986). The theory of lexical phonology. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, C. (1984). The linguistic constraints on a variable process: /t, d/ deletion in Sydney speech. BA Honours thesis, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Neu, H. (1980). Ranking of constraints on /t, d/ deletion in American English: A statistical analysis. In Labov, (1980). 37–54.Google Scholar
Payne, A. (1980). Factors controlling the acquisition of the Philadelphia dialect by out-of-state children. In Labov, (1980). 143–178.Google Scholar
Phillips, B. S. (1984). Word frequency and the actuation of sound change. Language 60:320–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaine, S. (1986). The effects of language standardization on deletion rules: Some comparative Germanic evidence from t/d deletion. In Kastovsky, D. & Szwedek, A. (eds.), Linguistics across historical and geographic boundaries (Vol. 1). Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter, 605–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousseau, P. & Sankoff, D. (1978). Advances in variable rule methodology. In Sankoff, D. (ed.), Linguistic variation: Models and methods. New York: Academic. 57–69.Google Scholar
Sankoff, D. & Labov, W. (1979). On the uses of variable rules. Language in Society 8:189–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W. & Herzog, M. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P. & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 95–189.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1969). A sociolinguistic description of Detroit Negro speech. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1974). Sociolinguistic aspects of assimilation. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar